[ntp:questions] systems won't synchronize no matter what

Terje Mathisen "terje.mathisen at tmsw.no" at ntp.org
Thu Oct 28 11:43:52 UTC 2010


Parvin, Richard wrote:
> I've noticed that a lot of people use iburst on thier server lines.
> I'm wondering why.

iburst, when it works, can reduce the initial sync time from ~5 minutes 
to a few seconds, at the cost of an initial burst of packets.

Terje
>
> Richard
>
>
> Richard C. Parvin
>
> Team Leader, Architect Technology Consultant IV Internet Access
> Engineering Hewlett-Packard
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From:
> questions-bounces+richard.parvin=eds.com at lists.ntp.org
> [mailto:questions-bounces+richard.parvin=eds.com at lists.ntp.org] On
> Behalf Of unruh Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 5:12 AM To:
> questions at lists.ntp.org Subject: Re: systems won't synchronize no
> matter what
>
> On 2010-10-27, Florin Andrei<florin at andrei.myip.org>  wrote:
>> On 10/27/2010 11:46 AM, Steve Kostecke wrote:
>>> On 2010-10-27, Hal Murray wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> restrict default ignore
>>>>>
>>>>> Your default restriction line is telling ntpd to ignore all
>>>>> NTP packets. This includes your remote time servers. The only
>>>>> NTP packets which are being allowed in/out are for 127.0.0.1
>>>>> and 192.168.3.0/24. This is why these three systems won't
>>>>> sync.
>>>>
>>>> How hard would it be to add some code to check to see if the
>>>> IP Address from a server line will get rejected by the
>>>> restrict statements and log a warning message?
>>>
>>> There is already a (better) solution in ntp-dev. Please see
>>> http://bugs.ntp.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1568#c1
>>
>> Yeah, anything along the general lines of the proposals above would
>> be great. Would have saved me a lot of trouble.
>>
>> I cleaned up ntp.conf and now the NTP clients are syncing up when
>> using the conf file below. Thanks everyone.
>
> The problem is really that people throw lines into their config file
> which have no idea whatsoever what they do. (This is even true of
> distribution maintainers). Why in the world were those restrict
> lines ever there in the first place? Similaraly why are those local
> servers there in the first place? (That one I blame the distro
> maintainer's for since they are the ones tht have have the localclock
> in there often). A distro's conf file should simply have three pool
> servers listed and that is it, and most people would be happy).
>
>>
>> ############################################ server 10.10.16.65
>> iburst server 10.10.16.64 iburst
>>
>> # excepting the servers from more drastic restrictions restrict
>> 10.10.16.64 noquery restrict 10.10.16.65 noquery
>>
>> # allow local queries restrict 127.0.0.0 mask 255.0.0.0
>>
>> # now close the door restrict default ignore
>>
>> driftfile /var/lib/ntp/drift
>> ############################################
>>
>
> _______________________________________________ questions mailing
> list questions at lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions


-- 
- <Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no>
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"




More information about the questions mailing list